The Catholic Front of the Tenth Crusade

By -
The Vatican threatens massive retaliation against any Islamist attack. Excerpt:

While the Islamist threat to the Vatican was widely publicized, less attention was paid to the Vatican response. Any attack on the person of the pope or Catholic holy sites would be met by “massive, disproportionate retaliation,” warned Monsignor Arcimboldo Bugiardo, Prefect of the Congregation for Armaments, speaking to this reporter behind one of the pillars of Bernini’s famed Colonnade, which surrounds St. Peter’s Square. “These people have no idea who they’re screwing with,” he said.

Msgr. Bugiardo would neither confirm nor deny widespread reports that the Vatican city-state has acquired an independent nuclear deterrent--purchased, sources suggest, from Eastern-rite Catholic Ukrainians in 1992, at the insistence of the hawkish Pope John Paul II. “I have nothing to say about that,” the priest said. “I am definitely not saying that under the right circumstances, the dome of St. Peter’s could open up like a missile silo. That is not what I’m saying,” he said.

Comments

  1. Bob Murphy6:23 PM

    Is this a complete joke, like an Onion article?

    In any event, I certainly would not think it wise to assassinate the pope. A lot more people around the world would support retaliation for that, than if a political leader were killed.

    ReplyDelete
  2. John Goes2:12 AM

    You really shouldn't have to ask such a question.

    And actually, I think the Pope would urge non-retaliation (at least against state targets), as long as the Vatican itself were not under threat of being literally taken over.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wabulon5:58 PM

    Nonretallion has much stronger force if you indeed have the means to retalliate catastrophically. If I were a cardinal of the Curia, I would certainly urge the Pope to buy nuclear weapons, which he, of all persons, is certainly rich enough to do.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous11:43 PM

    for one would be in favor of any form of retaliation against the extremist animals that kill innocent women and children in the name of a religion based on hatred and world domination.
    As long as we play by a differnt set of rules and values we will always be the victims, with our families and church at risk. Fighting back after a tragic event seems reactive not proactive.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous12:11 AM

    In life, we will face a lot of choices for us to choose. At times, we do not know how to choose, this is a hard thing for people to make a decision. Take aoc gold for example. That is an easy choice for you to make. If you do not know how to do now, please turn to make conan gold, then you will find surprise on aoc money. You will find that it is easy to make age of conan gold. If you do not know how to buy cheap aoc gold, I can help you.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose...
Read more